Recently, there was a bit of correspondence between moderators of our list about the question of whether aggressive Darwinists can be accused of being like Nazis.

Godwin's law. You lose.

Quote

Rather, the embarrassing problem is that the early Darwinists didn’t really believe what they wanted the public to believe - that natural selection created all things bright and beautiful. So they felt they had to interfere when they didn’t like what they were seeing - hence, eugenics.

Hmm, deliberate intervention into the "natural" order of things. I think that's called Intelligent Design.

Let me spell it out for you lurking UDites: Eugenics is intelligent design, not natural selection.

If you want to call experiments that coax bacteria to mutate and computer algorithms that solve problems using selection rules as intelligent design, then you have to call eugenics a form of intelligent design. Using your own logic, of course.

Quote

And today’s Darwinist doesn’t justify his NON-interference (i.e., distaste for eugenics) on the grounds that natural selection is at work and should not be interfered with. No, he grabs the notion of “human rights” whole from non-eugenic systems that don’t even try to address the question from a Darwinian perspective.

In other words, the theory of evolution has nothing to do with morals or laws? Well, thank you for clearing that up Densye.